§2.4 Multijurisdictional Practice

• Jurisdiction: Washington

IV. MULTIJURISDICTIONAL PRACTICE

The past few years have seen dramatic changes around the Northwest in the ability of lawyers to practice seamlessly across state lines. From formal reciprocal admission to enhanced temporary authorization to practice, Washington, Oregon, and Idaho have taken major steps to offering Northwest lawyers the opportunity to work in all three venues with comparative ease. This section focuses on three primary facets of MJP. First, it discusses Washington's reciprocal admission rule for lawyers from outside the Northwest and outlines the reciprocal admission compact that went into effect among Washington, Oregon, and Idaho on January 1, 2002. Second, it addresses a more limited set of reciprocal admission rules available for in-house corporate counsel in the Northwest. Finally, it examines the rules authorizing specific kinds of transitory practice by "out-of-state" lawyers.

A. Reciprocal Admission in Washington

In 2006, Washington adopted a broad reciprocal admission policy in the form of APR 18. APR 18 is a pure "mirror image" reciprocity rule—i.e., it offers reciprocal admission to out-of-state lawyers on substantially the same basis that the lawyer's "home" state would allow Washington lawyers to be admitted there.

To qualify under ARP 18's reciprocal formula, an applicant must:

• be an active member in good standing of the bar in a jurisdiction that accords Washington lawyers reciprocal admission .
• show good character; and
• pass the Washington Professional Responsibility Exam (WPRE) if the lawyer's home jurisdiction would require Washington lawyers being admitted there to pass the Multistate Professional Responsibility Exam (MPRE).

Under this Rule, Washington now offers reciprocal admission "on motion," for example, to Oregon, Idaho, and Alaska lawyers without requiring the Washington bar exam, provided applicants have practiced in their home states for the requisite number of years..⁴¹⁹ A complete list of reciprocal jurisdictions may be found in the ABA's Comprehensive Guide to Admissions, available online.⁴²⁰

B. Northwest In-House Counsel Admission Rules

Washington, Oregon, and Idaho have taken different paths to in-house counsel admission but reached the same place: relatively easy admission for in-house corporate counsel.

Until the new RPC were adopted, Washington had a specific in-house counsel admission rule, former APR 8(f), that allowed in-house corporate counsel to be admitted in Washington as long as they were members in good standing of the bar of any other state or the District of Columbia. The Supreme Court's order approving the new RPC also approved changes to APR 8(f). APR 8(f) is now limited to foreign in-house counsel and allows them to obtain a limited license to work directly for their Washington corporate employers and their affiliates. In-house counsel admitted in other American jurisdictions, by contrast, are now authorized to practice law in Washington by RPC 5.5(d)(1): "A lawyer admitted in another United States jurisdiction, and not disbarred or suspended from practice in any jurisdiction, may provide legal services in this jurisdiction that: (1) are provided to the lawyer's employer or its organizational affiliates and are not services for which the forum requires pro hac vice admission...."

Oregon and Idaho have taken the somewhat different approach of recognizing in-house corporate practice by out-of-state lawyers as being the authorized practice of law under their versions of RPC 5.5, but still require those lawyers to register and to pay annual licensing fees. Neither Oregon nor Idaho, however, requires out-of-state lawyers to take their full bar exams as a condition of in-house counsel admission. The Oregon and Idaho in-house counsel admission rules are, respectively, OR. R. FOR ADMISSION OF ATTORNEYS 16.05⁴²¹ and IDAHO BAR COMM'N R. 220.⁴²² Because Oregon...